ALC Game #4: Egypt/Hatshepsut

[Gnarfflinger]

I've had three Domination wins (and will snag a fourth before i start with England) this time around. Early War Chariots are a good kick start. I have to agree with the idea on Code of Laws. It slows the rate of decline that your economy will hit from over-expansion.

Another thing I found helpful was bypassing Hunting and Archery if I didn't need them right away and defending my cities with Axemen. When the games as England go down, I may play with that one further...

Incidentally I think it's Lizzy next actually...

 

[KrikkitTwo]

One thought, on population for Domination win, what were your final % for Domination pop, because if it uses the Demographic screen, you had ~67% of the world population [since you only had two rivals], But if it uses just a pop count (3 for this city, Two for that) which I think it does, then it might be something else

 

[sand]

when will the post mortem be

 

[Sisiutil]

One thought, on population for Domination win, what were your final % for Domination pop, because if it uses the Demographic screen, you had ~67% of the world population [since you only had two rivals], But if it uses just a pop count (3 for this city, Two for that) which I think it does, then it might be something else

Well, since you asked, here's the victory screen:

I won by .10%! Yes, settling Iron Island was obviously important. When you're going after a domination win, every land tile counts. If I'd been thinking, I should have slapped down a city beside that isolated desert iron tile in my northwest as well.

There's still a couple of tiles in the south-central desert that are unclaimed; Beaujolais was likely to snag them in a couple of turns, if need be:

I probably could have put one more pathetic little city down there, on the southernmost free tile. It could have worked the oasis and three grassland tiles, but nothing else. I don't think it would have sped up the win, though. Greenwich, as I said, claimed nearly a dozen tiles on that last border expansion, and only one of them was in this desert; the tiles I really needed were in the southern tundra.

And here's the map of the continent of Egypt:

And just for comparison, I went into Worldbuilder and go this screenshot of the continent of Fraztecia:

Dr. EJ, I think this makes Monty's late-game competitiveness even more interesting. He's rolling out medieval units against Nappy's industrial-era ones, and he's winning. Proof that overwhelming numbers and near-psychotic determination can, indeed, win the day against technically superior units. And we can add Monty to our list of AI civs capable of wiping out another one. I could have sworn it was Nappy, but the replay showed it was Monty all the way.

I forgot to mention, just a few turns before my win, after another French city fell, Nappy converted back to Judaism. I laughed my head off. Yes, it was likely a simple mathmatically-determined move because he lost all of his Islamic cities, but it seemed like a pathetic attempt to appease his enemy in the face of certain annihilation. "Wait! Stop! I've seen the light! See? I'm Jewish again! Oy vey! Shalom! Mazeltov! Please don't kill me, Bubby!"

Anyway, yes, the War Chariots are, when used properly (en masse) an awesome unit, and they are indeed underrated. I would rank them up there with the usual top three (Praetorians, Redcoats, and Cossacks), especially since they're available so early, with an easily-obtained resource, and are so darn cheap.

Part of using them properly, however, involves ensuring that you are building your economy and alleviating maintenance costs to finance your early warmongering. So after AH, I'd say Pottery and then a CoL slingshot are essential. Bronze Working is a bit of a lower priority, but still important. Next time I play as Hatty, I'll probably devote one city to building infrastructure and the Oracle (maybe Stonehenge too, for the GP points) while the other cities build WCs.

You also need to press your advantage. As Hans kept urging me until I finally paid heed, use the WCs and don't be afraid to sacrifice them. War booty will keep you research going, and you want to reduce your opponents' advancement as much as possible. The WCs have a surprisingly long period of usefulness, especially for open-field fighting. But once Longbowmen appear in enemy cities and their cultural defense reaches 40% or better, you'll need Catapults and Swordsmen to crack them open.

The next game will, as I said, be Victoria. I am skipping Elizabeth because I play as her frequently, and she's very popular (same reason I'm skipping Caesar and the Americans). I'm also trying to avoid some of the repetition we saw in the Mao and Qin games by only playing one leader from a civ, then going back to the others later. If there's a great hue and cry in favour of it, I'll go through a Lizzie game towards the end of the ALCs when I'm catching up on all the other leaders I missed.

Keep the comments coming!

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

Dr. EJ, I think this makes Monty's late-game competitiveness even more interesting. He's rolling out medieval units against Nappy's industrial-era ones, and he's winning.

Yes, though that seems to be partly by choice. That is, he has 3 cities building a rifleman, so he has technological parity with Napoleon if he wants it. I'm not sure why he'd be going so heavy on the knights. Assuming Napoleon has a decent number of riflemen, rifle vs. rifle would give much better odds than knight vs. rifle.

I'd say it looks like Montezuma was probably only a few turns away from putting Napoleon into exile on his little island of Elba. He has already conquered 3 out ot 5 legitimate cities (Dijon with population 1 doesn't count), so Paris and Rheims are probably on their way down. I doubt he would have been able to eliminate Napoleon completely, given the AI's inability to manage trans-oceanic invasions, but you really have to take your hat off to Montezuma on this one.

 

[Araqiel]

I forgot to mention, just a few turns before my win, after another French city fell, Nappy converted back to Judaism. I laughed my head off. Yes, it was likely a simple mathmatically-determined move because he lost all of his Islamic cities, but it seemed like a pathetic attempt to appease his enemy in the face of certain annihilation. "Wait! Stop! I've seen the light! See? I'm Jewish again! Oy vey! Shalom! Mazeltov! Please don't kill me, Bubby!"

I have actually seen this appeasement behavior before. In one game I played 3 Civs other than mine were Hindu (my religion), Alexander was Confusian, and Tokugawa/Elizabeth were jewish. After I mauled Tokugawa and was moving in on Elizabeth Alexander suddenly switched to Hinduism. Despite only having one hindu city and the rest all confusian. He remained Hindu for the rest of the game.

He might have been bribed by an AI to swap, but he certainly kept it to avoid being the only non Hindi in town .

 

[Lance of Llanwy]

^I've seen HC manage a successful amphibious invasion, and I think everyone's favorite neighbor could manage it as well, particularly because his victim's total annihilation seems more important to him than anything else...

 

[Zombie69]

I think you need to start playing at a higher difficulty level.

 

[pigswill]

So congratulations, 4 wins out of 4. You certainly seem to have got prince sussed. Some post-mortem thoughts:
Very little discussion this time about traits tho I expect spiritual came in handy at times, creative must have helped with the final land-grab.
Early blitzkreig could have been streamlined with the benefit of hindisght. Two thoughts: have an all chariot army for pillaging of strategic resources and also taking out weaker cities (20%def) that should be charging ahead and also have follow-up army of city-raider axes/swords (cats when available) for tough cities (usually capitals at start of game). Be more ruthless about razing cities; the only cities you shouldn't raze are the irreplacable ones (holy cities or world wonders); anything else can be replaced afterwards. The aim of early blitzkreig is not capturing cities but annihilating AI civs.
Religious differences are a huge factor in creating dissension and stirring up diplomatic trouble to the point its worth creating religious differences (so not like real life at all!).
Edit: worth thinking about tech path in this game;alphabet's been done to death already. You didn't need to research archery when chariots have same hammer price and do better against barb pillagers. AH,Bronze, CoL slingshot techs then either iron or maths/construction for cats before your research tanks. Its worth researching bronze early because you won't be building many starting cities and you'll need to have copper for your city-busting axes.

 

[vormuir]

Great fun, Sis. I'm enjoying these threads immensely.

One thing: you owe your early win (and consequent high score) in part to luck. Well, of course luck is always a factor, but I'm thinking of your happy discovery of the Napoleonic armada.

If you hadn't stumbled across his fleet, Nappy would have taken one and perhaps two of your cities. You would certainly have won the war -- you could outproduce him something like three to one at that point -- but it would have put a noticeable dent in your empire, and probably slowed down your win by 20-30 turns.

You still would have won, of course -- and you totally deserved to win, and win big. I'm just noting that the discovery of the armada (and your clever and effective strategy for dealing with it) accelerated your victory, and so supercharged your score.


Waldo

 

[Nares]

Go Monty!

For what its worth, I think Napoleon had a great number of forces outside those three cities that were starving heavily. He was probably following a campaign of razing. No less, he probably had fairly weak city garrisons, as it seems his intended target was Sisiutil.

Basically, Monty got lucky in capturing the cities, but was about to lose some himself. The AIs preferrence for pillaging improvements was what delayed those losses until after Sisiutil won.

As for why Monty managed to stick in there for so long, I think it was a combination of capturing well developed cities from Asoka (including a Holy City), and having a fellow Aggressive civ on his continent to trade with. Keep in mind, they were both Jewish until Napoleon founded Islam. I'm sure they had strong relations until then.

 

[Sisiutil]

Great fun, Sis. I'm enjoying these threads immensely.

One thing: you owe your early win (and consequent high score) in part to luck. Well, of course luck is always a factor, but I'm thinking of your happy discovery of the Napoleonic armada.

If you hadn't stumbled across his fleet, Nappy would have taken one and perhaps two of your cities. You would certainly have won the war -- you could outproduce him something like three to one at that point -- but it would have put a noticeable dent in your empire, and probably slowed down your win by 20-30 turns.

You still would have won, of course -- and you totally deserved to win, and win big. I'm just noting that the discovery of the armada (and your clever and effective strategy for dealing with it) accelerated your victory, and so supercharged your score.


Waldo

Not completely luck. My decision to send the Caravels back to scout was the lucky part. I forgot to mention that I spotted the armada resting at port in one of Napoleon's cities. So that caravel hung around that area to see if the armada launched, and if so, where it was headed. I've done this before with spies--in fact, I've parked spies in cities with an invasion fleet and have kept checking in every turn. This is the first time I've seen such a fleet actually launch.

The other lucky part may have been Napoleon's unwise conversion a few turns earlier. Knowing Monty, he may have been more than happy to round on his neighbour regardless, but the religious differences probably made him even more eager.

You certainly seem to have got prince sussed.

I think you need to start playing at a higher difficulty level.

Here are my thoughts on this, because I have a feeling I am going to hear this several more times before the ALCs are done.

First off, keep in mind that in these games I am benefitting tremendously from (a) the "hive mind" if you will, and (b) leaving the game for about a day every time something significant occurs. On my regular prince games I play in between ALC rounds (cuz I just can't get enough Civ!), I don't benefit from either, and I don't do nearly as well. Oh, I still usually win, but much later in the game, with much lower scores, and less impressively overall. I'm sure we'd all do better if we paused every 20 turns or so and asked other people for advice.

Second, I'm still learning, both great lessons and small ones. This was my first time attempting an early rush, and I learned a great deal from it that we've already discussed. I also did not know before this game that an AI civ will not tech trade unless it is in contact with at least TWO other civs. I'm learning little factiods like that about the game as I play through these matches.

Third, I'm not the only one learning. Based on responses within the thread and in my PMs, lots of people are learning from these threads. I also keep hearing that Prince is a good level for these games. Lots of people seem to play just below Prince or just above it, so the lessons here are applicable to the widest possible audience. As I get better at the game, the threads are taking on a more instructional nature, rather than me just looking for help. So the audience I'm mainly posting for is the people playing on Prince level and lower, which I suspect is the vast majority of those who play the game. My apologies to those playing Monarch and higher, but I'm not there yet, not even close, and I'm not really aiming these threads at you, so they may be little more than a diversion.

Fourth and finally, the ALC is a sort of grand experiment to explore each leader's unique combination of traits, starting techs, and UU. As such, I've resolved to keep all other game play variables--map, difficulty level, number of opponents, game speed--the same for each game, to keep the comparison between the leaders more valid. And the original "challenge" to myself was, indeed, to play one game through to the end as each leader before I moved up to Monarch level. As I've said before, I didn't expect the ALC threads to take off like they have, but as a result of that I feel even more obliged to keep within the boundaries I set for them from the start.

So all the ALC games will be on Prince (and a continents map, standard speed, with the standard 7 civs) until every leader is done.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Fourth and finally, the ALC is a sort of grand experiment to explore each leader's unique combination of traits, starting techs, and UU. As such, I've resolved to keep all other game play variables--map, difficulty level, number of opponents, game speed--the same for each game, to keep the comparison between the leaders more valid. And the original "challenge" to myself was, indeed, to play one game through to the end as each leader before I moved up to Monarch level. As I've said before, I didn't expect the ALC threads to take off like they have, but as a result of that I feel even more obliged to keep within the boundaries I set for them from the start.

Ancillary benefit: eventually these all go into an ALC Guide to Prince, or whatever, on relatively equal footing. Shifting gears midstream, you would have the additional change in opening tactics, as the advantages of the AI grow.

 

[pigswill]

Sisiutil:let us not forget that these are your games wot you're sharing with the rest of us and you can play any level you like. Saying that you've got prince sussed is not a criticism and might even be the opposite.

 

[Sisiutil]

Sisiutil:let us not forget that these are your games wot you're sharing with the rest of us and you can play any level you like. Saying that you've got prince sussed is not a criticism and might even be the opposite.

Thanks, piggy (hey, if people are gonna call me "Sis" or "Sissy", I feel entitled to dole out my own nicknames, Dubya-style ). I didn't think you meant it as a criticism.

Nevertheless, while they are, indeed, technically "my" games, the threads are a collaborative creation of the CFC community. And the overwhelming response to the threads makes me feel obliged to at least explain myself if I don't adopt a suggestion from that community.

Sorry if I came across as defensive. I didn't mean to be.

 

[pigswill]

Apologising for being defensive? Quit while you're ahead.

 

[frankcor]

Remember, it's a game. We play games to have fun.

 

[Sisiutil]

Apologising for being defensive? Quit while you're ahead.

Frankcor, thanks for the simple but vital reminder. Civ can be very involving and sometimes we all forget that it's just a game, a diversion, a pastime--it's just for fun!

Believe me, I wouldn't be posting these threads if I wasn't having a ball doing it, and that's because of everyone participating. So to the regulars like pigswill, VoiceofUnreason, Nares, Krikkiton, Hans Lemurson, vormuir, Dr Elmer Jiggle, the Tyrant, Araqiel, and Gnarfflinger; the more occassional but still insightful posters like actionmedia, vampy420, theimmortal1, drkodos, Lance of Llawny, and many others; and the many lurkers (I know you're out there!)...thanks!

On to Victoria!

 

[Eggolas]

Very nice game.

Now, will you please tell me how to rename units.

Now that you roundly trounced Victoria, you're going to play her. Redcoats!

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Now, will you please tell me how to rename units.

Select the unit
Click on the unit type (the white bar of the unit description box in the lower left)
Type new name in the textbox.